fbpx
01 / 05
Grim Old Days: A Brief History of the Worst Ways to Cure Everything

Blog Post | Health & Medical Care

Grim Old Days: A Brief History of the Worst Ways to Cure Everything

Mercury elixirs, mummy powder, and other quack cures were once considered the cutting-edge of medicine.

Summary: Medicine has come a long way from the days of mercury elixirs, bloodletting, and mummified remains as supposed cures. In Quackery: A Brief History of the Worst Ways to Cure Everything, Nate Pedersen and Dr. Lydia Kang explore the gruesome, bizarre, and often deadly treatments that once passed for medical science. From toxic metals to tobacco smoke enemas, history reveals a troubling pattern of desperation, ignorance, and “remedies” that did more harm than good.


Quackery: A Brief History of the Worst Ways to Cure Everything, by Nate Pedersen and Dr. Lydia Kang, surveys many of humanity’s most absurd and disturbing past medical practices. The volume presents a particularly gruesome picture of medicine in the preindustrial and early industrial eras.

In the 16th century, a physician known as Paracelsus advanced the view that “mercury, salt, and sulfur would bring about all manner of bodily cures.” By the 17th century, the field of medicine was engrossed in an ideological battle—and both sides were hopelessly wrong. On one side were those who extolled the supposed curative powers of toxic elements like mercury, while the other side favored humoral theory, the pseudoscientific idea that imbalances in four bodily fluids (blood, phlegm, yellow bile, and black bile) caused illness. “Galenical physicians who extolled the virtues of humoral theory were in a rage about the doctor-chemists who followed Paracelsus . . . and adored the purgative powers of mercury and antimony.”

Paracelsus also promoted the idea of drinking liquefied gold. He claimed, “Drinkable gold will cure all illnesses, it renews and restores.” It was possible to create drinkable gold by reducing gold to a salt called gold chloride that could be mixed into liquid. However, the resulting drink was not the cure-all that Paracelsus promised. “The gold chloride salts could cause kidney damage and something called auric fever, which not only made the sufferer feverish, but also involved profuse salivation and urination.”

“Physicians—such as seventeenth-century botanist and doctor Nicholas Culpeper—continued to prescribe gold for the same reasons Paracelsus did (sometimes even coating the gold chloride with a layer of gold to make a gilded pill, for extra effect). The drawbacks were a risk patients were willing to take” due to misplaced faith in gold’s efficacy.

Paracelsus invented a pill that he called laudanum and that he claimed could even raise the dead. What was this resurrection pill made of? Supposedly, “25 percent opium, plus mummy . . . bezoar stone taken from a cow’s digestive tract, henbane (a sedative and hallucinogenic plant), amber, crushed coral and pearls, musk, oils, the bone from the heart of a stag . . . and unicorn horn (more likely, rhinoceros or narwhal).”

Laudanum inspired copycats. “In the 1600s, Thomas Sydenham popularized his own take on laudanum . . . with one key addition: lots of alcohol. . . . It was touted as a treatment for the plague.”

Purported unicorn horns were once prized for their medical properties—resulting in the deaths of many narwhals and rhinoceroses to provide counterfeit products. “In the sixteenth century, Mary, Queen of Scots reportedly used a unicorn horn to protect her from poisoning.” Mummy-related medicine also had a lengthy pedigree. Hippocrates recommended the following for infertility: ‘When the cervix is closed too tightly the inner orifice must be opened using a special mixture composed of red nitre, cumin, resin, and honey.” “Red nitre” may have referred to soda ash, the same thing that ancient Egyptians used to dry out corpses during mummification. Then there was the frightening medical practice of consuming mummified remains.

An early Arabic medicine ingredient was mineral pitch called mumiya, from the Persian word mūm, or wax. It’s a sticky, sometimes semisolid black form of petroleum that was used for poultices and antidotes. Around the eleventh century, people began to misidentify another supposed source of this mineral pitch, a dark substance found in the head and body cavities of ancient Egyptian embalmed bodies. Called mummia or mumia, it soon became synonymous with the entire embalmed corpse or any products that came from it. What did minerals from a mummy skull taste like? A London pharmacopoeia in 1747 described it as “acrid and bitterish.” . . . Mumia from mummies was in high demand at its peak in popularity in fifteenth- and sixteenth-century Europe, partly from being understood as “the sovereign remedy” according to Paracelsus [who believed mummia] could cure almost anything.

“Mummy-infused poultices were used to heal snakebites, syphilitic sores, headaches, jaundice, joint pain, and . . . epilepsy. In 1586, French royal surgeon Amboise Paré exclaimed that when it came to healing bruises, mummy was ‘the first and last medicine of almost all our practitioners.’” A busy trade in mummies sprung up, and “hundreds of pounds of mummy parts were sold to London apothecaries” alone.

Suppliers could not meet the growing market demand for mummified corpses, at least not the ancient Egyptian variety, and often passed off more recently deceased bodies as Egyptian mummies. “After much plundering, mummies became scarce. Counterfeits began to show up in the form of other bodies—beggars, lepers, and plague victims, their corpses scavenged and then stuffed with aloes, myrrh, and bitumen, then baked or dried in a furnace and dipped in pitch.” The mummy medicine trend began to fade in the late 18th century.

There were other unfortunate cures for syphilis. Some patients suffering from syphilis underwent the following treatment regimen. “Elemental mercury was heated for steam baths, where inhalation was considered beneficial (and is a potent route of mercury absorption). Mercuric chloride was added to fat, and the resultant unction rubbed dutifully into sores. Sometimes, bodily fumigations occurred, where a naked patient was placed in a box with some liquid mercury, their head sticking out of a hole, and a fire lit beneath the box to vaporize the mercury. Sixteenth-century Italian physician Girolamo Fracastoro remarked that after mercury ointments and fumigations, ‘You will feel the ferments of the disease dissolve themselves in your mouth in a disgusting flow of saliva.’”

Calomel, a mercury chloride mineral, was once used to treat a variety of ailments, including mental illness. Benjamin Rush, a physician and signer of the US Declaration of Independence, prescribed the following for hypochondria: “Mercury acts in this disease, 1, by abstracting morbid excitement from the brain to the mouth. 2, by removing visceral obstructions. And, 3, by changing the cause of our patient’s complaints and fixing them wholly upon his sore mouth.” Mercury cures retained popularity for a long time. “It wasn’t until the mid-twentieth century that mercury compounds finally fell out of favor,” as humanity’s understanding of metal toxicity advanced. Today, mercury exposure is known to cause, “tremors, insomnia, memory loss, neuromuscular effects, headaches and cognitive and motor dysfunction,” in addition to kidney damage, nervous system damage, and even death.

Then there was antimony. In 1774, Oliver Goldsmith, the author of books such as The Vicar of Wakefield (one of the bestselling novels of the 18th century), felt ill. He asked an apothecary for St. James’ Fever Powder, a famous patent medicine. “Eighteen hours later, after a lot of vomiting and convulsions, Oliver Goldsmith was dead.” The powder contained antimony, and Goldsmith had consumed a lethal dose.

Antimony causes vomiting (and, in large enough doses, kills). In ancient Rome, Seneca the Younger claimed that some people “vomited to eat, and ate to vomit.” In other words, they induced vomiting to be able to consume more food at feasts than they otherwise could have. “An antimony-containing wine was reportedly used for such purposes.” The trend outlasted ancient Rome. “Fashionable in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, cups were made out of antimony, fondly called pucula emetic or calicos vomitoriius,” meaning vomit cups. “If too much antimony leached into the wine, the resulting drink would be deadly. One such cup, purchased in London’s Gunpowder Alley in 1637 for 50 shilling, killed three people. Then there were antimony pills. Unlike our one-use pharmaceuticals today, these metal pills were heavy, and after passing through the bowels they were often relatively unchanged. They were dutifully retrieved from latrines, washed, and reused over and over again. The ‘everlasting pills’ or ‘perpetual pills’ were often lovingly handed down from generation to generation as an heirloom.”

The physician Joshua Ward, who served England’s King George II, invented medicines known as “Wards Pill and Ward’s Drop, which he claimed could cure every single human malady from gout to cancer. They contained poisonous amounts of antimony. . . . Some of Ward’s formulations also contained arsenic.”

Patent medicines were often poisonous. “Fowler’s Solution, created in 1786, was 1 percent potassium arsenate with lavender flavoring,” meaning it contained arsenic. “It could cause a thiamine deficiency, leaving people with tingling extremities and racing hearts. . . . Arsenic had a tendency to dilate small capillaries in the face. So people got flushed cheeks and a look of bloom and health,” giving the impression that arsenic-based medicines were improving a patient’s physical condition when the toxin was accomplishing just the opposite. Even after industrialization, it took time for physicians to abandon medicinal arsenic. “Aside from Fowler’s Solution, arsenic products continued to be used freely throughout much of the nineteenth century.”

“Druggists sold gallons of laudanum opium elixirs, and narcotic nostrums. Take Dover’s Powder, an eighteenth century remedy containing opium, ipecac, licorice, saltpeter (potassium nitrate, great for explosives and pickling pork), and vitriolic tartar (potassium sulfate, a fertilizer). While treating colds and fevers, Dover’s Powder could put people to sleep . . . permanently. Of the effective dose—seventy grains—creator Thomas Dover said, ‘Some apothecaries have desired their patients to make their wills before they venture upon so large a dose.’”

It was once believed that tobacco “could cure upward of twenty diseases including cancer.” That is deeply ironic since tobacco causes cancer. Jean Nicot, from whose name we get the word “nicotine,” was a French ambassador to Portugal. “Convinced that tobacco was a nostrum [remedy] and a potential cure for all manner of ills, Nicot bundled up some tobacco plants and made a triumphant return to France, where Catherine de’ Medici was ruling as queen. In 1561, Nicot presented Catherine with tobacco plant leaves and instructions on how to powder the leaves and inhale them through her nose to relieve headaches.” She quickly became addicted. “During a plague outbreak in London in 1665, school children were actually told to smoke in their classrooms as a way to ward off the disease.”

A popular medical use of tobacco was to blow smoke, using bellows, up the anuses of apparent drowning victims in the hopes of reviving the unfortunate individuals.

Tobacco smoke enemas had their day in the sun in the eighteenth century when they were embraced by the British medical community for a very particular purpose: the resuscitation of the drowned. These were the days when drowning in the River Thames was such a frequent occurrence that a society was actually formed and funded with the sole purpose of promoting the resuscitation of drowned people. Elaborately dubbed The Institution for Affording Immediate Relief to Persons Apparently Dead from Drowning, its members prowled the dangerous banks of the Thames, their tobacco smoke enema kits at the ready should any poor soul stumble into the river and need to be revived. If that happened the society members would leap to the rescue, hauling the apparently drowned person out of the river, tearing off all of his clothes, rolling him onto his stomach, sticking an enema tube up his bottom, and striking up the fumigator and the bellows.

Why was such an undignified and futile method of resuscitation employed? Ironically, mouth-to-mouth resuscitation, an effective method of revival still used today, “was largely frowned upon by the medical community as ‘vulgar.’”

“In the 1700s, Johann Kimpf loudly proclaimed that all illness came from impacted feces (dry, hard stool that is ‘stuck’ in the colon). Hence, if you expelled them faster with enemas, you were less likely to get sick.” Enemas were seen as a cure-all. Physicians’ tendency to prescribe them for any ailment even became the subject of parody. Medical practitioners’ seeming “love of enemas became so extreme that Moliére’s The Imaginary Invalid poked fun at it in 1673. When the doctor is asked repeatedly how to cure dropsy, then diseased lungs, then chronic illnesses, his response is always ‘Give a clyster, then bleed the patient, afterward purge him. Rebleed him, repurge him, and reclyster him.’” The popularity of this treatment was widespread among the elite. “Clysters had become de rigueur and 2 la mode in fifteenth- and sixteenth century France [that] King Louis XIV was rumored to have enjoyed two thousand treatments in his lifetime.”

Alcohol’s health benefits were also frequently touted. “The thirteenth-century friar Roger Bacon wrote that wine could ‘preserve the stomach, strengthen the natural heat, help digestion, defend the body from corruption, concoct the food till it be turned into very blood.” In other words, he thought that alcohol aided digestion and even helped to convert nutrients into blood, presumably preventing anemia. As late as 1902, The Lancet, a respected medical journal, opined that brandy is “universally regarded as superior to all other spirits from a medicinal point of view.” The Italian physician Aldobrandino of Siena opined in 1256 that drinking beer “makes one’s flesh white and smooth.”

No history of medical quackery would be complete without mention of bloodletting. Bloodletting may have contributed to the death of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart in 1791, at the age of 35. “Bloodletter would smell, touch, and taste the blood . . .  to diagnose the patient.” In 1623, French physician Jacques Ferrand recommended bloodletting as a cure for lovesickness. The practice was not limited to Europe. “The Huang Di Nei Jing texts from the Han Dynasty prescribed bloodletting for symptoms of ‘incessant laughing’ or mania.” Writer Alexander Cruden was institutionalized multiple times for various actions deemed to be acts of insanity, such as criticizing incest among the nobility, and wrote that at Bethlehem Hospital, nicknamed Bedlam, “The common Prescriptions of a Bethlemitical Doctor are a Purge and a Vomit, and a Vomit and a Purge over again, and sometimes a Bleeding.”

In 1685, Charles II of England’s “fourteen physicians were under great pressure to keep him alive. Besides bleeding, the poor king endured enemas, purgatives, and cupping, and had to eat the gallstone of an East Indian goat. Plasters made from pigeon droppings were thoughtfully applied to his feet. They bled copious mounts from him again and again, once even slitting open his jugular veins, At The end, he was left nearly bloodless before he died.” Cupping was a method of bloodletting that entailed scraping the skin and then placing a cup over the area to create suction and draw out blood. He was not the only monarch to suffer such a fate. “Thirty Years Charles II’s niece, Queen Anne—then on the throne herself—was bled and purged after having fits and falling unconscious; she survived only two days after the doctors arrived.” Presidents proved no safer from the perils of bloodletting than kings or queens. In 1799, George Washington’s physicians aggressively “bled him, tried a drink of molasses, vinegar, and butter (which nearly choked him to death), blistered him, bled him again, tried laxatives and emetics, and bled him some more for good measure. A day later, he was bled yet again. All told, he may have been bled of five to nine pints of blood and died shortly after.”

A healer in Homer’s The Iliad, Podalirius, is referred to as a leech because of the creature’s association with that profession. There is historical “evidence of leech use for everything from removing evil spirits (Themison of Laodicea, Syria) to treating hearing loss (Alexander de Tralles). One medieval physician even claimed that it ‘sharpens the hearing, stops tears . . . and produces a musical voice.’”

Leeching was considered a gentle method of bloodletting. “Because leeching practitioners thought that the bloodletting ought to occur closest to the area of problem, the bloodsuckers were placed on the temples for headaches, behind the ears for vertigo, on the back of the head for lethargy, on the belly for stomach ailments, and over the spleen for epilepsy. And for menstrual afflictions, they’d be placed on the upper thighs, vulva, and sometimes directly on the cervix.”

Another strange medical trend involved cauterizing wounds with bizarre rationales. A burning hot nail-like tool known as a “St. Hubert’s key” was driven into flesh to cauterize dog bite wounds in the hope that doing so would prevent rabies. “In 1610, Jacques Ferrand recommended cauterizing the forehead with a searing hot iron for lovesickness. For swelling, a twelfth-century physician recommended no less than twenty burns all over thee body, including the temples, chest, ankles, under the lip, collarbones, hips,” and the list goes on.

Anesthesia was also primitive. “Ancient China used hashish. The Egyptians turned to opium. Dioscorides recommended deadly mandrake with wine. In the Middle Ages, there were even recipes for a ‘soporific sponge’ soaked in mandrake, henbane, hemlock, and opium, then dried in the sun. It was then rinsed in hot water, squeezed but left damp, and applied to the patient’s nose for inhalation.”

A 1758 issue of the Gentlemen’s Magazine reports that after two men were executed by hanging at Kennington Common in London, “a child, about nine months old was put into the hands of the executioner, who nine times, with one of the hands of each of the dead bodies stroked the child over the face” in the hope that this would cure the child’s skin problems (likely boils). There was a long tradition of such practices. Hippocrates wrote of using the “polluted blood of violence” to fight disease. In the first century, Pliny the Elder observed that “the blood of gladiators is drunk by epileptics as though it were the draught of life.” There are also accounts of people eating gladiators’ livers, again in the hope of curing epilepsy.

In 1651, the English physician John French’s recipe to cure epilepsy suggested the following: “Take the brains of a young man that has died a violent death, together with the membranes, arteries, and veins, nerves . . . and bruise them un a stone mortar until they become a kind of pap. Then put as much of the spirit of wine as will cover it . . . [then] digest it half a year in horse dung.” A 17th-century nosebleed cure entailed scraping moss off of an old skull and stuffing it up one’s nostrils. Christian IV of Denmark was said to have treated his epilepsy with skull powder. “Besides the powdered state, skulls were also shaved like ginger root, or sometimes used as a vessel to drink water.” In the 17th century, “skulls were often found hanging for sale in chemists’ shops in England and throughout Europe.” King Charles II purchased a medical recipe for liquefied and distilled skull that came to be known as the “king’s drops.” The treatment proved popular. For example, in 1686, a woman named Anne Dormer recorded taking “the king’s drops” to treat her feelings of restlessness. “In the 1700s, recommendations for spirit of human skull abounded for swoonings, apoplectic attacks, and nervous fits.”

Fifteenth-century Italian scholar Marsilio Ficino believed youthful blood could revitalize the aged and advised the elderly to “suck, therefore, like leeches, an ounce or two from a scarcely opened vein of the left arm” of a young person, or, if too squeamish for that, to “let [the blood] first be cooked together with sugar, or let it be mixed with sugar and moderately distilled over hot water and then drunk.” Such practices occurred in many places. “An Englishman named Edward Browne witnessed several executions in Vienna in the winter of 1668. After one beheading, he watched ‘a man run speedily with a pot in his hand, and filling it with blood, yet spouting out of [the corpse’s] neck, he presently drank it off.’ Others dipped handkerchiefs into the blood, hoping to cure themselves of epilepsy.” In the 1600s, a German physician suggested, “Choose the carcass of a red[headed] man, whole, clear without blemish, of the age of twenty-four years, that hath been hanged, broke upon a wheel, or thrust-through,” dry-cure his flesh and from it obtain a red healing tincture to treat wounds. Many people also believed that corpses could cure warts. In the 17th century, the English physician Robert Fludd noted that if “a dead bodies hand touch[es] warts they will dye [die].”

The touch of the living could also allegedly cure illness, provided that the touch was that of royalty. Scrofula was a form of tuberculosis that disfigured skin with unsightly growths. In 11th-century France and Britain, “the practice of kings touching scrofula-infected peasantry became legitimized as a medical practice. As a demonstration of their . . . healing prowess, King Edward the Confessor of England (c. 1000–1066) and King Philip I of France (1052–1108) began holding public exhibitions of scrofula healing.” Shakespeare’s Macbeth features a mention of Edward the Confessor’s alleged healing powers.

In 1660, one such healing ceremony, held by Britain’s Charles II, was described this way: “The surgeon cause[d] the sick to be brought or led up to the throne, where they, kneeling, ye king strokes their faces or cheeks with both his hands at once.” In fact, Charles II (1630–1685) touched “some ninety-two thousand scrofula patients during his twenty-five year reign, averaging about thirty-seven hundred people per year.” In France, “Louis XIV celebrated Easter in 1680 . . . by touching sixteen hundred scrofulous patients.” Peasants unable to journey to such a royal ceremony sought out alternative cures. In 1688, a particular horse in the remote Annandale region of Scotland reportedly could “cure the king’s evil [scrofula] by licking the sore.” Not all monarchs believed their hands could heal the sick. William and Mary, who took the English throne in 1689, opposed the practice, with William reportedly telling a diseased subject requesting his touch, “God grant you better health . . . and better sense.”

Women contended with some particularly bizarre medical advice. “For a successful childbirth, first-century scholar Pliny the Elder recommended putting the right foot of a hyena on the pregnant woman to help with the delivery. . . . The left foot would cause death.” He also advised “drinking goose semen” and “drinking liquids that flowed from a weasel’s uterus through its genitals” to pregnant patients. He had a further “recommendation to use a dog’s placenta as a catcher’s mitt to pull out the infant being born.”

The Trotula, a series of 12th-century medical texts from Salerno, recommended that women giving birth consume a potion made from hawk excrement. The Trotula advocated the following method of contraception: “Take a male weasel and let its testicles be removed and let it be released alive. Let the woman carry these testicles with her in her bosom and let her tie them in goose skin . . . and she will not conceive.” The authors of Quackery theorize, half-jokingly, that this contraception method may have been effective insofar as it served to disgust and drive away male romantic partners.

Children were routinely drugged. By the 17th century, “nursing mothers and wet nurses even drank gin to pass some of the healing properties of juniper onto the infants in their care. According to William Worth, a Dutch-English distiller: ‘It is a general custom in Holland, when the Child is troubled with Oppressions of Wind, for the Mother whilst the Child is sucking, to drink of the Powers or Spirits of Juniper, by which the Child is Relieved.’”

Drugging children was a long-standing practice. “The Ebers papyrus (1550 BCE) describes using poppy plants mixed with wasp droppings to soothe a crying child. Seventh-century physician and philosopher Avicenna recommended a poppy, fennel, and anise seed potion. From the 1400s until this past century, textbooks recommended varying concoctions with opium and morphine for both sleeplessness and teething. If the baby didn’t want to be weaned? Founding father Alexander Hamilton . . . recommended ‘a little weak white-wine whey, diluted brandy punch, or even a tea-spoonful or two of syrup of poppy . . . to prevent restlessness and fits of crying, till the breast is forgotten.’” A song from the popular musical Hamilton about how deeply the namesake protagonist and his rival Aaron Burr loved their children strikes one rather differently after learning that Hamilton drugged his weaning infants with opium, wine, and brandy to stop them from crying.

Blog Post | Human Development

The Grim Truth About the “Good Old Days”

Preindustrial life wasn’t simple or serene—it was filthy, violent, and short.

Summary: Rose-tinted nostalgia for the preindustrial era has gone viral—some people claim that modernity itself was a mistake and that “progress” is an illusion. This article addresses seven supposed negative effects of the Industrial Revolution. The conclusion is that history bears little resemblance to the sanitized image of preindustrial times in the popular imagination.


When Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber, declared in 1995 that “the Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race,” he was voicing a sentiment that now circulates widely online.

Rose-tinted nostalgia for the preindustrial era has gone viral, strengthened by anxieties about our own digital era. Some are even claiming that modernity itself was a mistake and that “progress” is an illusion. Medieval peasants led happier and more leisurely lives than we do, according to those who pine for the past. “The internet has become strangely nostalgic for life in the Middle Ages,” journalist Amanda Mull wrote in a piece for The Atlantic. Samuel Matlack, managing editor of The New Atlantis, observed that there is currently an “endless debate around whether the preindustrial past was clearly better than what we have now and we must go back to save humanity, or whether modern technological society is unambiguously a forward leap we must forever extend.”

In the popular imagination, the Industrial Revolution was the birth of many evils, a time when smoke-belching factories disrupted humanity’s erstwhile idyllic existence. Economics professor Vincent Geloso’s informal survey of university students found that they believed “living standards did not increase for the poor; only the rich got richer; the cities were dirty and the poor suffered from ill-health.” Pundit Tucker Carlson has even suggested that feudalism was preferable to modern liberal democracy.

Different groups tend to idealize different aspects of the past. Environmentalists might idealize preindustrial harmony with nature, while social traditionalists romanticize our ancestors’ family lives. People from across the political spectrum share the sense that the Industrial Revolution brought little real improvement for ordinary people.

In 2021, History.com published “7 Negative Effects of the Industrial Revolution,” an article reflecting much of the thinking behind the popular impression that industrialization was a step backward for humanity, rather than a period of tremendous progress. But was industrialization really to blame for each of the ills detailed in the article?

“Horrible Living Conditions for Workers”

Were horrible living conditions a result of industrialization? To be sure, industrial-era living conditions did not meet modern standards—but neither did the living conditions that preceded them.

As historian Kirstin Olsen put it in her book, Daily Life in 18th-Century England, “The rural poor . . . crowded together, often in a single room of little more than 100 square feet, sometimes in a single bed, or sometimes in a simple pile of shavings or straw or matted wool on the floor. In the country, the livestock might be brought indoors at night for additional warmth.” In 18th-century Wales, one observer claimed that in the homes of the common people, “every edifice” was practically a miniature “Noah’s Ark” filled with a great variety of animals. One shudders to think of the barnlike smell that bedchambers took on, in addition to the chorus of barnyard sounds that likely filled every night. Our forebears put up with the stench and noise and cuddled up with their livestock, if only to stave off hypothermia.

Homes were often so poorly constructed that they were unstable. The din of collapsing buildings was such a common sound that in 1688, Randle Holme defined a crash as “a noise proceeding from a breach of a house or wall.” The poet Dr. Samuel Johnson wrote that in 1730s London, “falling houses thunder on your head.” In the 1740s, “props to houses” keeping them from collapsing were listed among the most common obstacles that blocked free passage along London’s walkways.

“Poor Nutrition”

What about poor nutrition? From liberal flower children to the “Make America Healthy Again” crowd, fetishizing the supposedly chemical-free, wholesome diets of yore is bipartisan. The truth, however, is stomach-churning.

Our ancestors not only failed to eat well, but they sometimes didn’t eat at all. Historian William Manchester noted that in preindustrial Europe, famines occurred every four years on average. In the lean years, “cannibalism was not unknown. Strangers and travelers were waylaid and killed to be eaten.” Historian Fernand Braudel recorded a 1662 account from Burgundy, France, that lamented that “famine this year has put an end to over ten thousand families . . . and forced a third of the inhabitants, even in the good towns, to eat wild plants. . . . Some people ate human flesh.” A third of Finland’s population is estimated to have died of starvation during a famine in the 1690s.

Even when food was available, it was often far from appetizing. Our forebears lived in a world where adulterated bread and milk, spoiled meat, and vegetables tainted with human waste were everyday occurrences. London bread was described in a 1771 novel as “a deleterious paste, mixed up with chalk, alum and bone ashes, insipid to the taste and destructive to the constitution.” According to historian Emily Cockayne, the 1757 public health treatise Poison Detected noted that “in 1736 a bundle of rags that concealed a suffocated newborn baby was mistaken for a joint of meat by its stinking smell.”

Water was also far from pristine. “For the most part, filth flowed out windows, down the streets, and into the same streams, rivers, and lakes where the city’s inhabitants drew their water,” according to environmental law professor James Salzman. This ensured that each swig included a copious dose of human excreta and noxious bacteria. Waterborne illnesses were frequent.

“A Stressful, Unsatisfying Lifestyle”

Did stressful lifestyles originate with industrialization? Did our preindustrial ancestors generally enjoy a sense of inner peace? Doubtful. Sadly, many of them suffered from what they called melancholia, roughly analogous to the modern concepts of anxiety and depression.

In 1621, physician Robert Burton described a common symptom of melancholia as waking in the night due to mental stress among the upper classes. An observer said the poor similarly “feel their sleep interrupted by the cold, the filth, the screams and infants’ cries, and by a thousand other anxieties.” Richard Napier, a 17th-century physician, recorded over several decades that some 20 percent of his patients suffered from insomnia. Today, in comparison, 12 percent of Americans say they have been diagnosed with chronic insomnia. Stress is nothing new.

Sky-high preindustrial mortality rates caused profound emotional suffering to those in mourning. Losing a child to death in infancy was once a common—indeed, near-universal—experience among parents, but the loss was no less painful for all its ordinariness. Many surviving testimonies suggest that mothers and fathers felt acute grief with each loss. The 18th-century poem, “To an Infant Expiring the Second Day of Its Birth,” by Mehetabel “Hetty” Wright—who lost several of her own children prematurely—heartrendingly urges her infant to look at her one last time before passing away.

So common were child deaths that practically every major poet explored the subject. Robert Burns wrote “On the Birth of a Posthumous Child.” Percy Bysshe Shelley wrote multiple poems to his deceased son. Consider the pain captured by these lines from William Shakespeare’s play King John, spoken by the character Constance upon her son’s death: “Grief fills the room up of my absent child. . . . O Lord! My boy, my Arthur, my fair son! My life, my joy, my food, my all the world!” Shakespeare’s own son died in 1596, around the time the playwright would have finished writing King John.

Only in the modern world has child loss changed from extraordinarily common to exceedingly rare. As stressful as modern life can be, our ancestors faced forms of heartache that most people today will never endure.

“Dangerous Workplaces” and “Child Labor”

Dangerous workplaces and child labor both predate the Industrial Revolution. In agrarian societies, entire families would labor in fields and pastures, including pregnant women and young children. Many preindustrial children entered the workforce at what today would be considered preschool or kindergarten age.

In poorer families, children were sent to work by age 4 or 5. If children failed to find gainful employment by age 8, even social reformers unusually sympathetic to the plight of the poor, would express open disgust at such a lack of industriousness. Jonas Hanway was reportedly “revolted by families who sought charity when they had children aged 8 to 14 earning no wages.”

For most, work was backbreaking and unending. A common myth suggests that preindustrial peasants worked fewer days than modern people do. This misconception originated from an early estimate by historian Gregory Clark, who initially proposed that peasants labored only 150 days a year. He later revised this figure to around 300 days—higher than the modern average of 260 working days, even before factoring in today’s paid holidays and vacation time.

Physically harming one’s employees was once widely accepted, too, and authorities stepped in only when the mistreatment was exceptionally severe. In 1666, one such case occurred in Kittery, in what is now Maine, when Nicholas and Judith Weekes caused the death of a servant. Judith confessed that she cut off the servant’s toes with an axe. The couple, however, was not indicted for murder, merely for cruelty.

“Discrimination Against Women”

The preindustrial world was hardly a model of gender equality—discrimination against women was not an invention of the early industrialists but a long-standing feature of many societies.

Domestic violence was widely tolerated. In London, a 1595 law dictated: “No man shall after the houre of nine at the Night, keepe any rule whereby any such suddaine out-cry be made in the still of the Night, as making any affray, or beating hys Wife, or servant.” In other words, no beating your wife after 9:00 p.m. That was a noise regulation. A similar law forbade using a hammer after 9:00 p.m. Beating one’s wife until she screamed was an ordinary and acceptable activity.

Domestic violence was celebrated in popular culture, as in the lively folk song “The Cooper of Fife,” a traditional Scottish tune that inspired a country dance and influenced similar English and American ballads. To modern ears, the contrast between its violent lyrics and upbeat melody is unsettling. The song portrays a husband as entirely justified in his acts of domestic violence, inviting the audience to side with the wifebeater and cheer as he beats his wife into submission for her failure to perform domestic chores to her husband’s satisfaction.

Sexist laws often empowered men to abuse women. If a woman earned money, her husband could legally claim it at any time. For instance, in 18th-century Britain, a wife could not enter into contracts, make a will without her husband’s approval, or decide on her children’s education or apprenticeships; moreover, in the event of a separation, she automatically lost custody. Mistreatment of women, in other words, long predated industrialization. Arguably, it was the increase in female labor force participation during the Industrial Revolution that ultimately gave women greater economic independence and strengthened their social bargaining power.

“Environmental Harm”

While many of today’s environmental challenges—such as climate change and plastic pollution—differ from those our forebears faced, environmental degradation is not a recent phenomenon. Worrying about environmental impact, however, is rather new. Indeed, as historian Richard Hoffmann has pointed out, “Medieval writers often articulated an adversarial understanding of nature, a belief that it was not only worthless and unpleasant, but actively hostile to . . . humankind.”

Consider deforestation. The Domesday Survey of 1086 found that trees covered 15 percent of England; by 1340, the share had fallen to 6 percent. France’s forests more than halved from about 30 million hectares in Charlemagne’s time (768–814) to 13 million by Philip IV’s reign (1285–1314).

Europe was hardly the only part of the world to abuse its forests. A 16th-century witness observed that at every proclamation demanding more wood for imperial buildings, the peasants of what are today the Hubei and Sichuan provinces in China “wept with despair until they choked,” for there was scarcely any wood left to be found.

Despeciation is also nothing new. Humans have been exterminating wildlife since prehistory. The past 50,000 years saw about 90 genera of large mammals go extinct, amounting to over 70 percent of America’s large species and over 90 percent of Australia’s. 

Exterminations of species occurred throughout the preindustrial era. People first settled in New Zealand in the late 13th century. In only 100 years, humans exterminated 10 species of moa in addition to at least 15 other kinds of native birds, including ducks, geese, pelicans, coots, Haast’s eagle, and an indigenous harrier. Today, few people realize that lions, hyenas, and leopards were once native to Europe, but by the first century, human activity eliminated them from the continent. The final known auroch, Europe’s native wild ox, was killed in Poland by a noble hunter in 1627.

Progress Is Real

History bears little resemblance to the sanitized image of preindustrial times in the popular imagination—that is, a beautiful scene of idyllic country villages with pristine air and residents merrily dancing around maypoles. The healthy, peaceful, and prosperous people in this fantasy of pastoral bliss do not realize their contented, leisurely lives will soon be disrupted by the story’s villain: the dark smokestacks of the Industrial Revolution’s “satanic mills.”

Such rose-colored views of the past bear little resemblance to reality. A closer look shatters the illusion. The world most of our ancestors faced was in fact more gruesome than modern minds can fathom. From routine spousal and child abuse to famine-induced cannibalism and streets that doubled as open sewers, practically every aspect of existence was horrific.

A popular saying holds that “the past is a foreign country,” and based on recorded accounts, it is not one where you would wish to vacation. If you could visit the preindustrial past, you would likely give the experience a zero-star rating. Indeed, the trip might leave you permanently scarred, both physically and psychologically. You might long to unsee the horrors encountered on your adventure and to forget the shocking, gory details.

The upside is that the visit would help deromanticize the past and show how far humanity has truly come—emphasizing the utter transformation of everyday lives and the reality of progress.

This article was published at Big Think on 11/19/2025.

The Dubrovnik Times | Accidents, Injuries & Poisonings

Croatia Declared Mine-Free More than Three Decades After War

“More than three decades after the end of the Croatian War of Independence, Croatia has officially been declared mine-free, marking a historic milestone in the country’s postwar recovery.

The final landmine was removed earlier this year in Lika-Senj County, bringing to a close a nationwide demining effort that began immediately after the war.”

From The Dubrovnik Times.

Waypoint | Motor Vehicles

Waymo Takes Riders Further, Safely with Freeways

“The open road symbolizes freedom and unlimited possibility – highlighted especially by the ease and speed by which freeways allow us to get where we’re going. Waymo is now bringing that experience into the autonomous driving age, as we begin welcoming riders to use Waymo on freeways across the San Francisco Bay Area, Phoenix, and Los Angeles. 

We’re offering freeway access to a growing number of public riders and will introduce the service to more over time, including as we expand freeway capabilities to Austin, Atlanta, and beyond – always guided by our commitment to safety and service excellence. Freeway trips make Waymo even more convenient and efficient, whether you’re headed to Sky Harbor International Airport, cruising from Downtown LA to Culver City, or commuting in our newly expanded Bay Area service.

Today [11/12/25], we’re also opening access across the entire Peninsula, expanding service from San Francisco all the way down to San Jose, including curbside service at San Jose Mineta International Airport (SJC).”

From Waypoint.